Is it hypocritical for Rudi G. to be pro-choice but say he would appt. judges with conservative abortion views

Answer 1

It's not hypocritical, it's an outright lie...Giuliani is pandering to the base of the Republican party...once he gets the nomination (if that should occur) he will back away from that so fast your head will spin.

Answer 2

I don't recall Guiliani saying he is pro choice. What he has said is that he would uphold the laws of the land which currently allow for abortion. No different then what Bush, Reagan, or even Clinton has done. His idea of appointing judges is one far more intellectual for most to get and anyone thinking its about abortion is either ignorant or just a political hack that doesn't know better. A conservative judge is a strict constitutionalist and interprets the constitution. A liberal judge believes they can make law and that the constitution is this "growing document." It is simple fact that Roe V. Wade was a judge written law. Strict constitutionalist would never have written that opinion but instead put the issue back on congress and the president to create law on and decide.

Answer 3

No... actually it's not... because that is *NOT* what he said... What he said was that he would appoint judges that are constructionist in their view of the Constitution. That is they interpret the document as it was written, not as one thinks it should have been, should be now, or any other "living document" method of looking at the Constitution. That's the difference between a Conservative and a Liberal (or Progressive or Leftist, or whatever) The Conservative looks to the Constitution to see if abortion (or whatever) is even covered and if so if it is or is not "Constitutional" to regulate it.
A Liberal, on the other hand, looks at abortion (or whatever) and tries to "fit" it in as a Constitutional Right. Even if that means "reading between the lines" (which are actually just white spaces) or getting "president" from foreign courts.

Answer 4

Mayor Giuliani said that it would be acceptable to him if Roe v. Wade were overturned and it would be acceptable if it were upheld. He says the constitutionality question should be left to the court, but he would appoint strict constitutionalists to the Supreme Court.
He supports a ban on partial birth abortions if an exception is made for the life of the mother.
He now opposes federal funding for abortions, but said it should be left to each state to decide whether to provide funding.
Mayor Giuliani notes that when he was in charge in New York City, the number of abortions dropped and the number of adoptions rose.

Answer 5

No, it is not hypocritical, because the two things are not mutually exclusive.

Back in 1973, Yale Law School teacher John Hart Ely was completely adamant that the Roe decision was not a valid interpretation of the Constitution. But Ely was not and has never been opposed to abortion. Seven years later, he published a book "Democracy and Distrust" and advanced a theory of interpreting the Constitution which does not at all provide for any ruling like Roe v. Wade -- not only Roe itself but also the precedents that the Court purported to rely on.

And in that book he specifically said, "... for one most certainly can be a genuine political liberal and still believe, out of respect for the democratic process, that the Court should keep its hands of the legislature's value judgments." It is not a contradiction, Prof. Ely said.

~~~
netjr, down below, has stated it almost exactly right. But the terminology of "strict constructionist" should be avoided.

Answer 6

He's pandering for votes, they're all hypocrites from both parties. Why would anyone with any inkling of how things work in Washington be willing to spend millions of their own dollars to be elected to a job that pays a hundred sixty thousand a year? It's not for your benefit or mine, it's for their own. I wonder what a favorable vote from a congressman or senator is worth in corporate America? Never mind any monies or "gifts" that may change hands, what's the connection worth in the future? A seat on a board of directors, a nice consulting job who conducts business on the golf course?

Answer 7

Not at all. He is Pro-choice...meaning it is our choice, not the government's choice. His intent is to change the choices in our hearts to make the "right" choice. Maybe these conservative judges may have alternative ideas for women in need.

Answer 8

Is more hypocritical for him to have been pro-choice all his term as mayor yet says he personally despises abortion.

Answer 9

i admire that. he looks at character first and affiliation later. whats hypocritical about looking at the total picture of an individual?

Answer 10

it sure is. Guliani is a "vote whore"!